ENB Vol. 1 No. 26 UNCED-PC IV
Apr 5, 1992 by lgoree in
ESB NO. 26 "THE FINAL ONE" FROM PC
THE EARTH SUMMIT BULLETIN
VOLUME 1 NUMBER 26
PUBLISHED BY ISLAND PRESS
PREPARED BY:
LANGSTON JAMES GOREE VI "KIMO" - kimo@ax.apc.org
PAMELA CHASEK - pchasek@igc.apc.org
JOHANNAH BERNSTEIN - cpcu@web.apc.org
4 April 1992
PREPCOM HIGHLIGHTS
FRIDAY, 3 APRIL 1992
70TH MEETING OF THE PLENARY
The 70th meeting of the Plenary began at 10:00 am on Friday
to approve all the remaining documents produced at PrepCom IV.
The first document addressed was PC/L.74, "Status of the European
Economic Community at the UNCED". This draft decision recommends
that the General Assembly amends the rules of the Conference to
allow the EEC to participate in UNCED. The EEC will not have
voting rights; only the 12 member states can vote. As there was
no objection, it was adopted.
The next document discussed was PC/WG.I/L.44, "Conservation
of biological diversity." An effort had been made in the document
to avoid prejudging or duplicating the INC negotiations for a
framework convention on biodiversity. Working Group I Chair Bo
Kjelln explained that some of the remaining brackets will be
removed after the INC completes its negotiations. After a few
minor amendments were made, the document was adopted with
existing brackets in place.
The Plenary then took up PC/WG.I/L.45 and Corr.1,
"Environmentally sound management of biotechnology". A number of
brackets remained in this document in Programme Area D,
"Enhancing safety and developing international mechanisms for
cooperation," linked to the issue of biotechnology safety.
Brackets also remain in paragraph 14(c) on fertility-related
mechanisms. After a review of changes in the corrigendum and a
few minor amendments, the document was adopted.
Both Finland and the US attempted to make amendments after
Koh had closed discussion. Although controversy remained whether
these requests for the floor had been made prior to closure, Koh
was adamant in his ruling that negotiations could not be reopened
on any text after closure, fearing that a precedent setting
exception would lead to re-opened debate on other items. Koh's
ruling and the failed attempt to amend the text set the stage for
treatment of a similar situation that would occur more than
twelve hours later during discussions on the Rio Declaration.
The Plenary then quickly approved PC/L.57/Rev.1, which gives
UNCED observer status to associate members of regional
commissions. As no other documents were ready to be dealt with,
the Plenary adjourned before noon.
71ST MEETING OF THE PLENARY
The 71st session of the Plenary was convened at 3:40 pm and
took up WG.I/L.47 and Corr.1, "Protection of the Atmosphere".
Kjelln introduced the document noting that, as with the
biodiversity chapter, the work of the PrepCom cannot preempt,
prejudge or duplicate the INC negotiations for a framework
convention on climate change. He said that some of the bracketed
text can only be removed after the INC completes its work. Yemen,
on behalf of the Arab Group, stated that this document does not
fit the mandate of UN Resolution 44/228 nor does it meet the
Arabs' concerns. He added that since it prejudges the work of the
INC the entire document should be in brackets. Argentina asked if
these brackets also go around Programme Area C on ozone
depletion. Yemen reiterated that the entire document is to be
bracketed. Argentina responded, "This proposal is irrational."
Thus, with the entire text in brackets, the document was adopted.
The next document addressed was PC/WG.I/L.46, the statement
on forest principles. Kjelln explained that consultations on
this statement went until late last night and presented
additional amendments. The Plenary then began a debate that
resembled the work of the contact group. Amendments were made to
bracket individual words; a suggestion was made by India to
change "special role" to "sovereign right" in paragraph G; and
the list of amendments went on. Finally, Koh said that there was
no time for debate and asked if the group could adopt the
document. The document will now be sent to Rio as bracketed.
Koh then asked Bjornar Utheim, "Can we discuss technology
transfer?" To which Utheim, the group's coordinator, responded,
"I hope so." Thus, the Plenary then turned its attention to
PC/L.69 and Corr.1. Utheim introduced the document, explaining
that four options for the title of this document remain in
brackets, as do a number of paragraphs including amendments
requested by Saudi Arabia on "environmentally [safe and] sound
technology." Paragraph 13, on the terms of transfer of
technology, was the most difficult paragraph to negotiate. Two
sets of brackets remained in the paragraph, including brackets
around a single comma. The US stated that this problem could have
been resolved had there been more time and requested that the
paragraph be put in brackets. The document was adopted as
bracketed.
The Plenary then heard an oral report on the status of
financial resources. Discussions on financial resources had
broken down last weekend. Koh then took over and called on a
group of countries to draft a non-paper to be the starting point
for negotiations. He asked Mexican Ambassador Andre's Rozental to
coordinate the new round of talks.
Jorge Montan~o, on behalf of Rozental, explained to the
Plenary what had taken place over the last three days.
Representatives from Japan, some members of the European
Community and the Nordic Group put together a draft text, which
Koh transmitted to a G-77 contact group for comments. Thursday
night the G-77 contact group, Japan, the EC and the Nordics met
together to discuss the text. Although some headway was made,
they could not agree on a formula. The G-77 proposed that in view
of the sensitive nature of the issue, consideration of L.41/Rev.1
(the G-77 text that had been tabled earlier in the Prepcom)
should continue in Rio. Montan~o concluded by saying in the
coming weeks they would come up with ways to resolve these
issues. This oral report was followed by statements by Pakistan
(G-77), Denmark (Nordics), Canada (CANZ), the Russian Federation,
Japan, the US, China, Poland and Gambia. All expressed gratitude
to Rozental and expressed hope for success in Rio. Koh then
adjourned the Plenary for dinner.
72ND MEETING OF THE PLENARY
The Plenary reconvened at 8:00 pm with the goal of working
without a break until it had completed all unfinished business.
The first item on the evening's agenda was PC/WG.II/L.25/Rev.1,
the "Oceans" chapter of Agenda 21. Three pages of amendments were
distributed along with the document, reflecting consultations
that had been held on the issue of straddling and highly
migratory fish stocks. Governments were close to consensus on
this issue by the end of the week but needed more time. Thus,
paragraphs on certain high seas fishery issues remain in
brackets. The Republic of Korea attempted to bracket paragraph
66, which encourages states to join regional high seas fisheries
organizations, but was met by resistance around the room. Upon
adopting the document, as amended, Koh expressed the need for
greater cooperation on high seas fisheries and appealed to the
European Commission to be as helpful as possible in Rio.
The next document addressed was PC/WG.III/L.31 on
institutions. Ismail Razali, the coordinator on this issue,
introduced CRP.3/Rev.3, the results of continued consultations on
institutions. Although a few brackets remain in CRP.3/Rev.3,
remarkable progress had been made on an Agenda 21 chapter that
had been stalled just a week ago. Mauritania intervened on
paragraph 18, which addresses secretariat support structure for
the follow-up of Agenda 21. The tension rose as New Zealand
requested that a paragraph on dispute resolution, that was part
of the original negotiating text, be reinserted into CRP.3/Rev.3
under section L., "Legal Matters". The US said this paragraph
could only be reinserted if it was amended. Argentina and
Colombia stated that they did not accept the inclusion of this
paragraph (para. 37 from L.31) in the document. Koh called for a
five minute recess to meet with Razali, New Zealand, Argentina,
Colombia and the US to try to work out a compromise. Upon return,
Koh announced that the Plenary could only accept amendments if
there is consensus and since there was not, New Zealand's
amendment was rejected. New Zealand objected, but Koh insisted,
saying that there is no other way or the Plenary would not finish
its business. When New Zealand questioned the decision by the
Chair, Koh requested the governments to challenge his rule. None
did and debate continued on several other proposed amendments
before the document was finally adopted at midnight.
Koh then moved to WG.I/L.43 and Corr.1, "Combatting
deforestation." Malaysia expressed its opposition to text that
calls for negotiating an appropriate legal instrument on forest
management and requested that this text in paragraph 21 bis
remain bracketed. Several other amendments were proposed and the
document was adopted at 12:30 am.
The Plenary then addressed WG.III/L.32 on legal instruments.
Philippine Ambassador Reynaldo Arcilla, the coordinator on this
issue, introduced the document, and Koh immediately asked if the
document could be adopted. With no further discussion the
document, as bracketed, was adopted.
The next document discussed was PC/L.76, a proposal
submitted by the Chair on the preamble for Agenda 21. Koh
explained that a draft of this document had been submitted to all
regional groups and negotiated in a contact group Thursday night.
Two parts of this text remain in brackets: reference to
"political commitment at the highest level" on development and
environment cooperation; and paragraph 4 on financial resources.
Several amendments were proposed and, upon the understanding that
the preamble would be readdressed in Rio, the document was
adopted.
The next document was PC/L.77, a draft decision that changes
the rules of procedure for the Conference so that Brazil, the
host country, would be added as an ex officio Vice President.
Tunisia objected to the last sentence of the document, in that it
implied that there would be sub-groups and sub-committees at Rio
and that this would prejudice the participation of developing
countries that could not send large delegations to Rio. Upon
Koh's promise that Tunisia's concerns would be addressed in
another draft decision, the document was adopted.
The Plenary then addressed PC/L.78, on guidelines for the
preparation of Agenda 21. India, Tunisia, Mauritania and others
expressed concern about the status of paragraphs in the
introductions of the Agenda 21 chapters, since not all working
groups negotiated the introductory texts. After considerable
debate, Koh asked the working group chairs if they were willing
to undertake a joint responsibility with the Secretariat to
determine which introductory paragraphs should remain in the
text. The Chairs agreed, paragraph 3 was reformulated to reflect
this, and the document was adopted at 2:20 am. Koh then read a
draft decision, prepared upon Tunisia's request earlier in the
evening, on the participation of developing countries at UNCED.
This decision was quickly adopted.
Discussion then turned to PC/WG.III/L.33/Rev.1, "Principles
on General Rights and Obligations" (the "Rio Declaration",
formally the Earth Charter). Koh introduced the document saying,
"After today I am no longer Chair of the PrepCom and I want a
present from you." He explained that on Wednesday morning he
heard a report on the Rio Declaration from the Chair of Working
Group III and the two coordinators. They felt that negotiations
had gone as far as they could and that it was time for the
PrepCom Chair to take over. That morning, Koh held a meeting with
Chairs of the regional and interest groups and decided to form a
restricted contact group to negotiate text. Seven OECD countries,
seven G-77 countries, China and the Russian Federation made up
this contact group that met on Wednesday night and Thursday and
adopted a bracket-free text at 6:30 pm Thursday. Koh explained
that each of these principles is carefully balanced and crafted
and appealed to everyone to let this be the only clean text to be
brought to Rio for further consideration. "Any amendment will
lead to the unravelling of the entire package," he added.
The G-77, EC, Nordic Group and CANZ all supported sending
this text unbracketed to Rio, even though it was far from a
perfect document. Israel then took the floor to decry the "threat
of political pollution at PrepCom" and referred specifically to
the "innocuous" reference to "people under occupation" in
Principle 23. "Is Rio going to be another Middle East
battleground?" he asked. He then requested that the entire
Declaration be put in brackets. Koh responded that there are to
be no brackets or amendments. Delegates from a number of other
countries intervened to support sending the document unbracketed
to Rio. Even Maurice Strong spoke on behalf of "this historic
document". Finally, Koh asked if we can transmit the document,
with Israel's reservation, to Rio without brackets and quickly
gavelled the discussion closed. Israel, who had requested the
floor before the document was adopted, protested. Koh said, "Do
whatever you feel is necessary." To which Israel responded, "I
will."
At 3:45 am, the Plenary turned its attention to the last
chapter of Agenda 21 it had to adopt: PC/L.72, "Strengthening the
role of major groups." A Youth delegate gave an accusatory
statement and then the debate started. France lifted reservations
it had placed on the text. Malaysia expressed concern that some
parts of this document blurs the distinction between the work of
NGOs and the work of governments. Several amendments were
proposed and discussed before Kenya suggested that the Plenary
adopt the document as it stands and let the coordinator, Leon
Mazairac continue consultations. Thus, the document was adopted.
The final document approved was PC/L.73, the report of the
PrepCom. Then at 4:30 am, Maurice Strong took the floor to
express his admiration and gratitude for the work of the PrepCom,
and especially the work of its Chair, Tommy Koh. He added that
between now and Rio there is a need to "revitalize political will
and elevate vision". Koh thanked everyone and apologized to the
PrepCom for not having achieved more. The leaders of the regional
groups then took the floor one by one to express their thanks to
Koh. Michael Kokeev of the Russian Federation returned to his
metaphor from PrepCom I and told Koh, "With a captain like you,
we are ready to sail to the end of the world." When Macedo Soares
from Brazil spoke, he said, "We don't have to sail to the end of
the world, only as far as Rio." At 5:00 am, with a final note of
apology to members of the PrepCom, especially New Zealand and
Israel, Tommy Koh adjourned the final meeting of the UNCED
Preparatory Committee. The delegates, NGOs, interpreters and
Secretariat staff, who had lasted through the night, headed home
as the sky brightened over the East River.
THINGS TO LOOK FOR BETWEEN NOW AND UNCED
The final chapter of the UNCED process, to be played out in
Rio, will be less denouement and more conflict resolution as the
climax is yet to come. After 5 weeks of negotiations and,
according to UN sources, 24 million pages of documentation
produced at PrepCom IV, there are a number of problems that still
need to be resolved before the Rio Conference. These problems are
found in cross-cutting areas, whole documents, and at the
Conference site.
ATMOSPHERE: The Agenda 21 chapter on "Protection of the
atmosphere" has enjoyed a certain protection from
controversy. The PrepCom has avoided entering into any
substantive area that would duplicate or pre-judge the
parallel negotiating process for the Climate Change
Convention. If the INC is unable to reach agreement at
the final negotiating session later this month in New
York, look for this chapter to get very complicated in
Rio.
THE MIDDLE EAST CONFLICT: Both Israeli and Palestinian
delegates politicized the UNCED debate last week with
diplomatic sparring. The representative from Palestine
introduced several amendments with wording familiar to
the Arab-Israeli conflict as it has been played out
within the UN. Look for Israel to lodge a protest for
its treatment by PrepCom Chair Tommy Koh, when he
"quick-gaveled" Israel at 3:45 am Saturday morning.
FINANCIAL RESOURCES: Unbridgeable gaps existed between
the EC proposals and the G-77 expectations (especially
on the GEF) as negotiations on financial resources
broke down at the end of PrepCom IV. Although official
statements during the PrepCom had downplayed the
chances of an agreement here, progress was made and
negotiators were close to agreement. Observers both
within and outside the US delegation commented that the
US could have reached agreement at PrepCom IV on the
basis of the last G-77 proposal. Brackets remain in all
chapters of Agenda 21 within the "Means of
implementation" sections since the cost of the
programmes cannot be finalized until the source of
funds and mechanisms for their disbursement are found.
Look for discussions on these matters at the following
events: both the GEF participants meeting and the IMF
and World Bank Development Committee meeting at the end
of the month; the meeting in early May of EC
environmental ministers; the OECD talks in Paris on the
Climate Change convention; the meeting of environmental
ministers from developing countries to be held in
Malaysia this month; the meeting of "eminent persons"
to be held in Japan; and the final negotiating sessions
for both the Climate Change and Biological Diversity
Conventions.
TRANSFER OF TECHNOLOGY: Most contentious issues related
to the transfer of technology were resolved at PrepCom
IV. Problems still remain around the means of transfer:
commercial or preferential and concessional. Another
issue is Saudi Arabia's request for the document to
deal with "environmentally [safe and] sound
technology". Ambassador Bjornar Utheim may hold
consultations on both these issues during the inter-
sessional period.
FORESTS: The discussions on the Forest Principles
document at PrepCom IV ended up having very little to
do with forests and a whole lot to do with the North-
South debate. The document is a political bomb-shell
and may never make it to Rio. Look for Bo Kjelln to
draft a new version that could be proposed as a
"Chair's text" from the floor in Rio after extensive
inter-sessional private consultations and general de-
politicizing.
THE RIO DECLARATION: Despite Strong's pleas that there
be an "Earth Charter" in Rio, the name remains "The Rio
Declaration". An unbracketed Chair's draft will go to
UNCED only because Tommy Koh borrowed heavily on his
great reservoir of personal and political capital. If
it had not been for Koh's insistence, the late hour and
a very fast gavel, debate would have been protracted.
Many countries have problems with the text that looks
much more like a Second Committee compromise than the
inspirational document that had been hoped for.
However, the negotiations were successful in elevating
important principles (that will assist in the
resolution of transboundary environmental disputes) to
soft law. These include: environmental impact
assessment. prior notification and the precautionary
principle.
THE CONFERENCE SITE: Construction has only just begun
at the UNCED site in Rio, amid resignations and firings
over the financial irregularities that surrounded the
letting of contracts. Although the Brazilian
authorities will be doing all they can both to ensure
completion and to keep news of the scandals to a
minimum, those close to the situation are nervous,
fearing strikes, congressional inquiries and financial
over-runs.
OTHER AGENDA 21 PROBLEM AREAS: A number of unresolved
issues that were taken "bracketed" from the contact and
working groups and through Plenary are being passed on
to Rio for resolution. In some cases inter-sessional
consultations will take place. These issues include:
straddling and migratory fish stocks; disposal and
storage of radioactive wastes near the marine
environment; future legal instruments for both forests
and semi-arid and arid lands; safety concerns related
to biotechnology; military use of radioactive and
hazardous waste-producing substances; consumption
patterns in developed countries; and, finally, family
planning.
The Earth Summit Bulletin is published by Island Press and
distributed free of charge to the participants at the Fourth
Session of the Preparatory Committee for the United Nations
Conference on Environment and Development. Funding for the
preparation has been provided by grants from the Ford Foundation,
The Compton Foundation and the W. Alton Jones Foundation. This
issue of Earth Summit Bulletin is prepared by Johannah Bernstein
(cpcu@web.apc.org), Pamela Chasek (pchasek@igc.apc.org) and
Langston James Goree VI "Kimo" (kimo@ax.apc.org). Earth Summit
Bulletin can be contacted at Island Press, 1718 Connecticut
Avenue, N.W., Suite 300, Washington, D.C., 20009, USA, (202) 232-
7933 and (202) 234-1328 (fax). E-mail lgoree@igc.apc.org. The
opinions expressed in Earth Summit Bulletin are those of the
authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of Island Press
or our sponsors. The contents of Earth Summit Bulletin may be
freely used in other publications with appropriate citation.
Earth Summit Bulletin is uploaded daily on the APC networks into
the conference .